Antarctica sets new record for sea ice area
The sea ice surrounding Antarctica, which, as I reported in my book, has been steadily increasing throughout the period of satellite measurement that began in 1979, has hit a new all-time record high for areal coverage.
The new record anomaly for Southern Hemisphere sea ice, the ice encircling the southernmost continent, is 2.074 million square kilometers and was posted for the first time by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s The Cryosphere Today early Sunday morning.
The previous record anomaly for Southern Hemisphere sea ice area was 1.840 million square kilometers and occurred on December 20, 2007.
Global sea ice area, as of Sunday morning, stood at 1.005 million square kilometers above average.
More here: http://talkingabouttheweather.wordpress.com/2014/06/29/antarctica-sets-new-record-for-sea-ice/
And also at the WUWT Sea ice page: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
I thought the Arctic pack was growing but Antarctic was shrinking! That’s what the Warmists told me anyway.
With low sunspot counts the ice grows. But, there is an active volcano under the western part of the north and south ice packs maybe three, they wont talk about that warming the water below and melting ice. its not the air. its the sea floor and lava. sssshhh.. dont tell anyone.
Don’t be a contrary douche, Bill P. I’d say that this is a welcome piece of research, and one that should be studied fully, because it’s not just important that we know how much sea ice there is, it’s also important that we know how long it lasts, as that’s the real bellweather of temp changes in the region.
I believe Cryosphere uses Area. You mention Extent in post title.
They also use 1979-2008 as their mean. That makes Arctic look lower and Antarctic look higher.
:)
REPLY: Right you are. While NSIDC focuses on extent, Cryosphere Today focuses on area. I’ve made the change.
What is the difference between sea ice area and extent?
Area and extent are different measures and give scientists slightly different information. Some organizations, including Cryosphere Today, report ice area; NSIDC primarily reports ice extent. Extent is always a larger number than area, and there are pros and cons associated with each method.
A simplified way to think of extent versus area is to imagine a slice of swiss cheese. Extent would be a measure of the edges of the slice of cheese and all of the space inside it. Area would be the measure of where there is cheese only, not including the holes. That is why if you compare extent and area in the same time period, extent is always bigger. A more precise explanation of extent versus area gets more complicated.
More here: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/faq/#area_extent
-Anthony
Now that is what I call a hockey stick, Note also that we are just past mid winter down in this part of the world and there is a lot of freezing yet to come.
Data here.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.south.anom.1979-2008
Although the anomaly has been creeping up on the all-time record in the last few weeks, the last two days have increased by 200,000 km2 each compared to the average 85,000 km2 so it is possible there are some data issues.
But 18% above normal is not a sign of global warming, it is the opposite. To be honest, it is a little disturbing.
CAGW novice here. I have heard the claim from the alarmist camp that this surprising sea ice record is a result of the outward distribution of fresh water from the rapidly melting ice masses. How much merit does this claim have?
REPLY: Two things to note.
1. It is winter down there, and most of the continent is below freezing, as is the area outside the continent. http://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/GLBhycom1-12/navo/antarcsstnowcast.gif
Where would that meltwater come from?
2. This NASA article talks about the issues, and while salinity is mentioned it isn’t given much prominence.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/antarctic_melting.html
-Anthony
More ice on this Fourth Rock does not seem a very good thing to me. What happens when the sea-ice extends to the tip of South America, and cuts off the Roaring Forties? Now, THAT will have an enormous effect on global climates.
I do, however, still require ice with my vodka & tonic. Especially with the global temperatures reportedly getting out of control (/sarc)
Satellite measurements began in 1973. The period beginning in 1979 corresponds with the maximum extent in the Arctic. Cherry picking? See page 150 of the full IPCC WG1 report from 1995.
Obviously caused by Global Warming. Ban the Deniers, burn their books, remove them from Public Office.
It is all so simple, Gaia must prevail.
Absolutely freezing here tonight in Hervey Bay, Australia, on the edge of the tropics – 25 degrees south of the Equator. Could use some of that global warming.
First, how is asking a legitimate question “being a contrary douche?”
Second, at what point do Warmists admit that, even if their warnings are correct, dismissing legitimate questions regarding how they arrived at their conclusions isn’t a “fringe thing” but actually part of scientific inquiry?
Bill Illis
“But 18% above normal is not a sign of global warming, it is the opposite. To be honest, it is a little disturbing”
Well the ice core record for the last 500,000 years shows that our interglacial is coming towards an end and then we are looking down both barrels of the next glaciation period . Looking at that record is like one of those ‘what happens next’ movies that used to be shown in British schools in the fifties and early sixties.
In all seriousness are we privileged or just damn unlucky to be living around that turning point
And the difference is …?
Remember when Chris Turney and his flock aboard the M.V. Akademik Shokalskiy declared that the Antarctic sea ice was growing because of the excessive fresh water runoff from the fast- melting Antarctic continental ice cap? Get ready for that meme to be redeployed.
Thanks, Harold.
Regards
Goes to show you that the DEMS and GLOBAL WARMING ideologues are after TAX MONEY. Their science has a few ozone holes in it.
According to climate models, this is all predicted- sea ice will increase and increase until it reaches zero sea ice.
Gore disciples had better start praying to Mother Earth for global warming – unless of course they consider the inability to grow food for a few billion people to be a good thing.
I nominate Yancy award as today’s interweb winner!
It’s better than we thought!
Alan Robertson says:
June 29, 2014 at 7:13 am
“Remember when Chris Turney and his flock aboard the M.V. Akademik Shokalskiy declared that the Antarctic sea ice was growing because of the excessive fresh water runoff from the fast- melting Antarctic continental ice cap? Get ready for that meme to be redeployed.”
But surely if there was any shred of truth about that theory then we should see positive sea ice anomalies of the southern coast of Greenland? Same principle surely.
Sounds like a good opportunity for the global warming/climate change/whatever they nowcall themselves to claim the Antarctic freeze is locking up all the atmospheric miosture and causing worldwide droughts. When the ice melts they can claim worldwide flooding as a result of increased atmospheric moisture. No matter the weather condition, the alarmists will find a way to futher their political agenda and blame man as the cause of the disaster. I am awaiting word that earthquakes are caused by the weight of too many people. Volcanoes are caused by man cooking out doors and heating up the ground. I can see the crowds chanting “No more luaus…no more luaus”. Yeah, mankind has really screwed up the earth. The end is near. The sky is falling. The oceans willrise and everyone will die. Iam pretty sure the earth has survived dramatic changes in climate, the rise and fall of the oceans, wide spread volcanic activity with the resulting polution, hot periods, cold periods, and the beat goes on. Of course, thebeat offers opportunitiesformsny who can use emotions and distorted ‘facts’ to sell an agenda.
Take 4 mms of fresh water and put it on top of 5,000,000 mms of salty water.
What happens? Absolutely nothing.
Josh Payne says:
June 29, 2014 at 6:40 am
_________
Here’s a fascinating and very informative documentary made by NSF divers beneath the Antarctic sea ice. At one point, they show melt water pouring into the sea, where it freezes within seconds and forms underwater “ice falls”.
Bill P asks:
…at what point do Warmists admit that, even if their warnings are correct, dismissing legitimate questions regarding how they arrived at their conclusions isn’t a “fringe thing” but actually part of scientific inquiry?
I’ve been asking that for the last couple of years. When every alarmist prediction turns out to be wrong, intelligent folks will begin to wonder if the basic premise was wrong.
Planet Earth is clearly telling us. There is no global warming. There just isn’t.
2004: ‘Antarctica is likely to be the world’s only habitable continent by the end of this century if global warming remains unchecked, the Government’s chief scientist, Professor Sir David King, said last week.’ (http://www.rense.com/general52/ahbi.htm)
2014: the story so far. It is going to be harder and harder for poor folks to reach this promised land by sailboat and on foot, what with all this new ice in the way and all. All that green pastureland waiting for them will be taken by wealthy folks like King arriving in their private jets. (http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/8/11/king-of-carbon-emissions.html).
Just a brief reminder about the polarizing lens on the orbiting satellite. Before 2008 the Arctic ice extent charts showed an upwards bump on 1 July when the polarizing lenses were switched from Antarctic to Arctic mode — this was so that Arctic melt ponds would not be interpreted as open water. The reverse switch was on 1 January so was not evident on the charts because it was at the edge. Anyway, people complained about the bump so they decided to “improve” the chart by gradually turning the polarizing lens. This rapidly became carte blanche for turning the lens any way they wanted, and accounts for much of the symmetry seen nowadays — when the Arctic ice anomaly rises, the Antarctic anomaly falls, and so on. Today we see the Antarctic ice anomaly rising to record levels even as the Arctic ice anomaly is oddly dropping even as the ice edge is strong — this is because the Arctic ice concentration has dropped to about 75% – 80% all across the ice cap — because the melt ponds are all being interpreted as open water (see the washed out orange color on the ice concentration map). It’s just that they’ve (presumably) turned that polarizing lens all the way into Antarctic mode to report as low an Arctic ice area as possible– which thus causes the reported Antarctic ice extent to skyrocket.
This account is my interpretation of what is happening, as it is consistent with the past few years of sea ice data. What’s needed is someone in the satellite data area to come forth and tell the reality.
Ice ages have always been associated with slight wobbles in the earth’s axis relative to the sun. They are caused by the earth and the moon orbiting a point between them. The moon doesn’t really orbit the earth as much as it does this point (called the barycentre). Also there are the slight variations of the sun’s output and the distance the earth is from the sun. These changes have been mostly moderate, though there have been periods when ice covered a substantial area of the earth. The global warmists might be right, but I doubt it. They have not followed the scientific method and thus have not done science.
The “Global Warming” scam is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated. There have many climate changes in the few billion years the earth has been around, and most of them occurred well before man arrived on the scene. So even if the present “Global Warming” fraud were true, which is unlikely, it’s a real stretch of the imagination to blame it on man. Plus the hustlers’ “solution” for this non-event is to undermine the American economy and to transfer sovereignty from individual nations and surrender power to the UN. Should we take better care of our planet? Of course! But the “Global Warming” scam should be thrown out with the garbage, not to be recycled.
During the summer we prefer to focus on the Arctic ice extent. We don’t look at the southern hemisphere until around January. Please get with the program.
How about some of you smart folks here poke holes in this for me?
For a couple of years now I have spent a good deal of time scanning various climate sites as I strive to gain an understanding. I have read several books on the subject also. I am not going to pretend that I have even come close to have really scratched the surface of this very complex subject. But the one central thing I have tried to decide is what I should really look at to determine if and how much significant global cooling or global warming is going on. I think I have finally decided the best way to keep track of it using strictly objective data that is easy to interpret for the average person even with no science aptitude or back ground .
So here it is.
Now the freezing point of water does vary slightly. Fresh water freezes at a slightly higher temperature than sea water for example. But this variability is miniscule in almost all conditions found on the earths surface. So when it comes to determining if our earth is cooling or warming in the general sense the amount of sea ice is a very good measurement over the long term. In the short term the amount of sea ice is not nearly as reliable a measurement for determining cooling or warming because storms, currents, and volcanic activity can significantly effect it’s volume and coverage.
And thus as far as I’m concerned the best single way for a layman to get a handle on if the earth is warming or cooling is to monitor the sea ice extent at both poles. It seems very clear that in the past when global cooling has occurred the most obvious sign has been markedly decreased melting of the ice during the summer months at both poles. That is a prime sign of when an ice age is begining. It is not so much the amount of accumulation of snow and ice at the poles during their winter months that is a sign of cooling as it is the lack of dissipation of ice during the summer months. The opposite applies for general global warming. In short it is the amount of melting that occurs during the summer months at both poles that is the simplest measurment to understand that accurately reflects cooling or warming of the globe.
This layman is tired of models though I understand the need to strive to prefect them in order to try to develop long term forecasts and understand our climate. But for now when it comes to determining global cooling or warming it seems to me the best course for the average guy who doesn’t have training as a statistician is to watch the poles.
Why are temperatures not a good gauge of global warming or cooling for the layman? The fact is that almost all of the temperature data our government agencies and various other agencies around the world publish are statistically “adjusted” for various reasons. Often such “adjustments” are made to fill in blank spots in the data when measuring stations go down or when the measurements from stations are not reported in a timely manner. Other such adjustments are made to account for the fact that large urban areas are heat islands that remain warmer than surrounding rural areas. Even satellite temperature data is adjusted for various reasons. No matter the reason for the adjustments the fact is that they are made using statistical methods and the particular statistical method(s) selected to be applied is based solely on the judgment of people. IOW what your getting when you look at historical temperature data is to some extent colored by AN OPINION!
So the third year the sea ice extents remain significantly above the mean during the summer months at both poles then I will start being concerned about cooling. The opposite goes for warming. No corruption or “adjustment” of temperature data can change these signs. So it seems to me that the satellite measurements of the sea ice extents at BOTH POLES, while not always perfect by any means, as has been proven in the past, are still far more reliable and less susceptible to tampering or error than temperature data at any level from any source and thus make the best and most easily understandable and reliable gauge for the layman to make his/her own judgment on what the worlds temperature is doing.
Anthony, WUWT made the Drudge Report.
Sweet.
In central Wisconsin USA, where the southern edge of the last Ice Age stopped. No ice here today except in our freezer.
Josh Payne, you don’t need liquid meltwater that then bizarrely refreezes when it moves from the cold interior to the saltwater sea, since ice itself is plastic enough to flow but that also spells grow. A bit of ocean induced melting merely helps lubricate ice particles to flow faster so a random warm spike can briefly accelerate ice flow.
In other words, you are being lied to by propagandists and hacks who are smoke screening away Antarctic ice growth with mere soundbites. The same people point to ice breaking off as if that’s due to melting ice instead of ice growth. Since Antarctica is so terribly cold throughout the year, in a warming world with resulting higher humidity, overall Antarctica becomes a sea level sink as it freezes out all that extra humidity and only let’s it go through ice flow. The hockey stick team was so troubled by Antarctic mainland cooling that they were willing to suffer scientific shame by illegally smearing the highly volcanic Peninsula warm trend out over the whole continent with blatantly bad math. News cycle complete, after winning the cover of top journal Nature, the peer reviewed skeptical debunking of it only appeared many months later:
http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/nature_cover.jpg
The following site has the Antarctic anomaly very cold lately.
http://cci-reanalyzer.org/DailySummary/index_ds.php
Today, it is -4.02 while the Arctic is -0.32.
Three of the last six months were the warmest on record.
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2014/06/23/May-2014-was-Earths-warmest-May-on-record-NOAA-says/5331403569273/
http://www.weather.com/news/science/environment/april-2014-global-temperature-ties-warmest-record-noaa-20140520
http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/12/17/warm-november-global-climate-report/4052839/
OUOTE: “the outward distribution of fresh water from the rapidly melting ice masses” That’s like saying if I put an ice cube on a plate and it melts the melting water will flow out and refreeze on the plate. Really? How is the climate hot enough to melt the ice yet at the same time cold enough to refreeze the melting water?
I guess Al Gore better get down there with his backpack blow torch and get busy. This will take money out of his pockets…
I notice that on the WUWT sea ice page there are no graphs such as this for Antarctic sea ice:
http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/science/images4/nsidc-antarctic-sea-ice-extent-max.jpg
I was looking for when the antarctic sea ice is at it’s maximum – looks like late September.
I wonder why there are a plethora of graphs for arctic sea ice available, but “none” for antarctic sea ice?
Bias maybe?
Jeff Christie says:
June 29, 2014 at 8:12 am
Three of the last six months were the warmest on record.
_________________
Oh, by record, did you mean the instrumental record of the past 160 years or so, since the use of thermometers began and since the end of the Little Ice Age? Did you also mean the “adjusted” temp record?
How about during the summer of 2013, when 2899 Record cold temps vs 667 record warm temps were recorded?
R. Shearer says:
June 29, 2014 at 6:58 am
Satellite measurements began in 1973. The period beginning in 1979 corresponds with the maximum extent in the Arctic. Cherry picking?
———————————————
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_of_sea_ice
“so the practical record begins in late 1978 with the launch of NASA’s Scanning Multichannel Microwave Radiometer (SMMR) satellite.”
Oops, forgot link: http://iceagenow.info/2013/08/2899-record-cold-temps-667-record-warm-temps/
There is a lot of ocean around Antarctica and the sea surface temperatures in the Southern Annular Area – 60 South to 70 South are running “cool” and have been since an apparent step change circa 2006
Reynolds monthly SSTa – 2000 through May 2014
http://nomad1.ncep.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/pdisp_sst.sh?ctlfile=monoiv2.ctl&ptype=ts&var=ssta&level=1&op1=none&op2=none&month=jan&year=2000&fmonth=may&fyear=2014&lat0=-70&lat1=-60&lon0=-180&lon1=180&plotsize=800×600&title=&dir=
Also SSTa’s from yesterday – Earth Wind map:-
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/ocean/surface/currents/overlay=sea_surface_temp_anomaly/orthographic=-89.39,-87.18,819